For example, Hellie also talked to a player recently who had attempted to see the owner to lobby for his positional coach to keep his job.

"He was literally stopped at the door by the secretary, who said all football matters have to go through Bruce Allen," Hellie told me. Which seems to make some amount of sense.

This indicates that yes in the past players walked straight up to Snyder's office (as we assumed), interestingly he was directed to Allen, not Shanahan, so there is some level of equality and separation, and BA is taking full control of the GM level issues. Seems like a good end to an otherwise unsettling article.

Also, I still don't mind if DS sits in on game film study, but what was the "Shudder" part is that JZ felt if he didn't do it, someone else(VC) would do it, and manipulate DS through it. Anyone else still rejoicing that VC is gone?!

I thought it only fitting given the elation around the Shanahan/Allen thing despite how many times we've been burned in the past 10 years.

*****
I just re-read what I wrote and noticed that I accidentally put "their" when I should have put "there"

That is a typo and not a lack of knowing the correct usage of "there".

...I really can't stand when people do that so I wanted to correct it.
*****

Expectations should be tempered just on the fact that our team needs to be overhauled just to get the right personnel for these coaches in the appropriate places. Our OL needs to be overhauled and that alone is 5 positions of starters/backups that need to be addressed.

Rome wasn't built in a day and if you think it can be then you're suffering from the same lack of foundation that the Skins have.

This indicates that yes in the past players walked straight up to Snyder's office (as we assumed), interestingly he was directed to Allen, not Shanahan, so there is some level of equality and separation, and BA is taking full control of the GM level issues. Seems like a good end to an otherwise unsettling article.

Also, I still don't mind if DS sits in on game film study, but what was the "Shudder" part is that JZ felt if he didn't do it, someone else(VC) would do it, and manipulate DS through it. Anyone else still rejoicing that VC is gone?!

Ugh. I shudder every time Kevin plays the sound clip of VC saying "for the fans." It literally makes me nauseaus.

BA was definitely "running interference" between the coaches/players and Snyder. The only question is, at what point does Snyder decide to go around Allen to get more involved. Not once, during Snyder's 11 year ownership of the team, has been able to stay out of the way of the men he's hired to do their jobs. Everything seems all rosey to some folks here, but what happens if Shanahan starts 2-6 in his second year with the team? Only then will we really know if things have truly changed.

People can make all the arguments they want about how its Snyders team and he should have "X" amount of involvement. But history has shown that whenever Snyder meddles, he makes a bad situation even worse.

Hellie asked the coach why he would take the time to do that with everything else he had on his docket. Zorn in turn explained that Snyder had wanted someone to watch tape with him and that "If someone was going to explain to him why plays were called and why things were run, I wanted it to be me, I didn't want it to be anybody else."

Shudder. Anyhow, sometime during the season the weekly film sessions stopped, perhaps as part of the broader changes instituted by Allen. For example, Hellie also talked to a player recently who had attempted to see the owner to lobby for his positional coach to keep his job.

"He was literally stopped at the door by the secretary, who said all football matters have to go through Bruce Allen," Hellie told me. Which seems to make some amount of sense.

"Stay medium." Isn't that the philosphy of arguably the worst coach in our franchise's history?

Shanahan failed in Denver for two primary reasons:

1) He had final say over personnel and Denver repeatedly made poor personnel decisions
2) He picked poor defensive coordinators

Shanahan's been here a week and we know two things about him.

1) he has final say over personnel
2) He picked a poor defensive coordinator

Taking a "wait and see" approach and expecting to see different results is like watching a child, who has repeatedly put his hand on a hot stovetop, reach for that hot stove stop top again and taking a "wait and see approach" to see if he gets burned. Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results... isn't that what we criticized the LAST regime for? Isn't that what we called insanity? So what does that say about those here who are taking a "wait and see" approach as they see history repeating itself over again before their eyes?

Ugh we get it dude, you hate everything the team does right now and we're doomed. Personally I don't see where we're continuing with the same old in any regard. Vinny is gone, new GM, new coach with a proven track record, Snyder out of the way, etc. It just seems that you are intent on spinning everything to the negative, there's really no use in trying to convince you otherwise.

Ugh we get it dude, you hate everything the team does right now and we're doomed. Personally I don't see where we're continuing with the same old in any regard. Vinny is gone, new GM, new coach with a proven track record, Snyder out of the way, etc. It just seems that you are intent on spinning everything to the negative, there's really no use in trying to convince you otherwise.

Mike Shanahan - "proven track record"??? What do you mean by that? He won ONE playoff win in the last ten years. If you want to go back 11-15 years, then yeah, he had alot of success. But so did Gibbs 1.0. Instead of thinking Shanahan can replicate what he did 11-15 years ago, aren't you the slightest bit concerned about why he couldnt come close to that level of success in the past ten years?

What on earth makes you think we're getting Shanahan of 11-15 years ago, and not Shanahan of 10 years ago to the present? When shanahan has a history of selecting poor defensive coordinators and he's hired yet another one, what makes you expect a different result?

you keep criticising me for being negative. I'm a redskins fan but I don't wear burgundy and gold colored glasses. I don't put blind faith in every move the redskins make and think it will succeed because i'm a fan. Its a shame that the skins have been bad for so long that people's standards have dropped so low.

I don't automatically hate everything the team does. If we had, for example, hired Eric DeCosta as GM and he had interviewed 4-5 candidates and ultimately hired Bill Cowher as head coach, who then hired Charlie Weiss as OC and Romeo Crennel as DC, i wou'dnt be hating a thing. I don't know how all of those people would have worked togehter, but they each have had proven track records of success in their respective areas of expertise.

The men we've selected to fill those roles with this team haven't anywhere near that same level of success. I'm skeptical - not because I want to be - but because I'm not all that impressed with the resume's of a single one of the hires we've made. We've basically taken a bunch of people who have been poor to above average in their respective areas of expertise over the last decade and we're expecting these guys to somehow all "get it right" and take us to the promised land. But why? What evidence do we have to merit such faith?

you say you can't change my mind - well you know what? you CAN change my mind. I just need EVIDENCE. What EVIDENCE do you have that:

1) Bruce Allen and Mike Shanahan will do better at drafting players than they did in Tampa Bay and Denver.

2) Jim Haslett will be a better defensive coordinator than he has been in the past.

Give me any argument that contains evidence and not "we just have to wait and see" and i'll be THRILLED beyond belief.

Mike Shanahan - "proven track record"??? What do you mean by that? He won ONE playoff win in the last ten years. If you want to go back 11-15 years, then yeah, he had alot of success. But so did Gibbs 1.0. Instead of thinking Shanahan can replicate what he did 11-15 years ago, aren't you the slightest bit concerned about why he couldnt come close to that level of success in the past ten years?

What on earth makes you think we're getting Shanahan of 11-15 years ago, and not Shanahan of 10 years ago to the present? When shanahan has a history of selecting poor defensive coordinators and he's hired yet another one, what makes you expect a different result?

you keep criticising me for being negative. I'm a redskins fan but I don't wear burgundy and gold colored glasses. I don't put blind faith in every move the redskins make and think it will succeed because i'm a fan. Its a shame that the skins have been bad for so long that people's standards have dropped so low.

I don't automatically hate everything the team does. If we had, for example, hired Eric DeCosta as GM and he had interviewed 4-5 candidates and ultimately hired Bill Cowher as head coach, who then hired Charlie Weiss as OC and Romeo Crennel as DC, i wou'dnt be hating a thing. I don't know how all of those people would have worked togehter, but they each have had proven track records of success in their respective areas of expertise.

The men we've selected to fill those roles with this team haven't anywhere near that same level of success. I'm skeptical - not because I want to be - but because I'm not all that impressed with the resume's of a single one of the hires we've made. We've basically taken a bunch of people who have been poor to above average in their respective areas of expertise over the last decade and we're expecting these guys to somehow all "get it right" and take us to the promised land. But why? What evidence do we have to merit such faith?

you say you can't change my mind - well you know what? you CAN change my mind. I just need EVIDENCE. What EVIDENCE do you have that:

1) Bruce Allen and Mike Shanahan will do better at drafting players than they did in Tampa Bay and Denver.

2) Jim Haslett will be a better defensive coordinator than he has been in the past.

Give me any argument that contains evidence and not "we just have to wait and see" and i'll be THRILLED beyond belief.

Proven track record as in look at Shanahan's career accomplishments. I think that speaks for itself.

It's not about blind faith man, it's about letting things play out and giving this new regime a chance before you write off everything.

Right now nobody knows for sure how this is all going to work. I can't tell you it's going to work, just like you can't tell me it's not going to work. Everyone can spin all the stats and numbers all they want to fit their views, truth is we have to see how things play out on the field.

"Stay medium." Isn't that the philosphy of arguably the worst coach in our franchise's history?

Shanahan failed in Denver for two primary reasons:

1) He had final say over personnel and Denver repeatedly made poor personnel decisions
2) He picked poor defensive coordinators

Shanahan's been here a week and we know two things about him.

1) he has final say over personnel
2) He picked a poor defensive coordinator

Taking a "wait and see" approach and expecting to see different results is like watching a child, who has repeatedly put his hand on a hot stovetop, reach for that hot stove stop top again and taking a "wait and see approach" to see if he gets burned. Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results... isn't that what we criticized the LAST regime for? Isn't that what we called insanity? So what does that say about those here who are taking a "wait and see" approach as they see history repeating itself over again before their eyes?